Advanced Point and Shoot Canon SX1

[Mad Owl]

I am looking for one of advanced point and shoot cameras. I was leading toward the Sony HX1 but I have read that the picture quality was terrible above a 5x7.

I had the Canon SX10 which I was very unhappy with how it preformed.

So what are people's opinions on the Sony vs the Canon, or any of the other in this category?

[postcardcv]

Hi and welcome to BirdForum

From reviews I've read there isn't much to choose between the current crop of superzooms, the Sony and Canon's probably just edge it. The image quality of the SX10 is supposed to be better than that of the SX1, especially at higher ISOs. If the SX10 wasn't up to the job then it might be worth considering a DSLR instead.

[pshute]

I am looking for one of advanced point and shoot cameras. I was leading toward the Sony HX1 but I have read that the picture quality was terrible above a 5x7.

I had the Canon SX10 which I was very unhappy with how it preformed.

So what are people's opinions on the Sony vs the Canon, or any of the other in this category?
I haven't tried either, but if I was buying a camera today (I have an S3) I'd want to be able to put a teleconverter on it. I'm not sure that the SX10 will take one, although there might be a third party adapter available, no idea idea with the Sony. Even a 1.7x teleconverter makes a world of difference to shots that aren't close up.

I also find that the ability to manually focus when necessary is handy. This is awkward on the S3, partly because you have to hold down the MF button while you do it, partly because you have to click the up and down arrows to adjust it. I think the SX10 uses the dial to adjust, not sure what you have to do with the MF button. I've read complaints that the dial is a bit unresponsive or unpredictable, but it might just take getting used to.

Image quality is important, because bird photographers end up doing so much cropping. Even if we print at 4x6, the enlargement is the equivalent of far bigger than that.

The Fujifilm S100FS is the only current model compact I know of that has a focus ring, but I have no idea what the image quality is like. I've heard the focus adjustment is a bit unresponsive, and that's how it was when I tried one in a shop. Could be a matter of getting used to it though.

[etudiant]

The superzooms are all built around very small sensors, so their image quality lags that achieves by their DSLR counterparts, especially in very long focus or low light situations.
Their lower cost and size is also part of that tradeoff.
So it is unlikely that changing brands will provide you with a large gain in image quality. You can expect such improvement from a change in format, albeit at great expense.
Spending some time with the detailed reviews on sites like http://www.dpreview.com or http://www.cameralabs.com/ is a fun way to build the alternatives assessment.

[njlarsen]

The superzooms are all built around very small sensors, so their image quality lags that achieves by their DSLR counterparts, especially in very long focus or low light situations.
Their lower cost and size is also part of that tradeoff.
So it is unlikely that changing brands will provide you with a large gain in image quality. You can expect such improvement from a change in format, albeit at great expense.
Spending some time with the detailed reviews on sites like http://www.dpreview.com or http://www.cameralabs.com/ is a fun way to build the alternatives assessment.

The Fuji S100fs (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/FujiFilm/fuji_finepixs100fs.asp) mentioned above has half the pixel density of the competitors, so in theory, it should have possibility of a better image quality. Notice I say in theory, I have no personal experience, as I wanted a smaller, lighter camera for myself ...

Niels

[spunky12]

I think the sony mentioned lacks a viewfinder and only has the lcd to compose your shot. I find this unacceptable for serious photography. I have the older Sony dsc-h2 with the 1.7 teleconverter and it is great (i almost always use the viewfinder) but am looking at DSLR for upgrade to do larger prints. The cost looks to be about triple or more for a DSLR and good telephoto zoom lens. dpreview also mentioned above is a good resource.

Spunky12

[pshute]

I think the sony mentioned lacks a viewfinder and only has the lcd to compose your shot. I find this unacceptable for serious photography.
I agree, for two practical reasons:
- It's often simply too hard to see the LCD because of light reflecting off it, etc.
- Even when you can see the LCD ok, it's still hard to find the bird to get it in the middle for focusing, because the resolution is relatively poor, and the bird is so tiny. Using the viewfinder, and holding the end of the lens in my left hand, I've found that with practice I can often swing the camera up to my eye and get the bird near the middle first try, just like with binoculars

A lot of compact cameras, even with long focal lengths, retract when turned off. This means you can't be holding the lens already as you turn it on and start to raise it to your eye. So I've found that adding a teleconverter, or even just the adapter for it, makes my first attempt at aiming more precise, despite the smaller field of view.

[eastwood]

How about Nikon P90? I am interested to know too.

[Mad Owl]

Actually I did get to look at this camera and asked if it did have a viewfinder because I can't see seriously trying to take a picture off the LCD. The glare drives me crazy on my digiscoping camera, Nikon P5100, which without a hood you wouldn't be able to see what you’re shooting.

It does have a usable viewfinder, and I would only use the LCD to look at how a picture turned out.

I didn't make it clear that I was comparing the Sony to the Canon SX1.

I already have an DSLR, Canon 20D with the 100-400 ISM. I also have a chronic pain problem and can't lug around that much weight anymore. That's why I want to try out these advanced P&S cameras.

The trouble is I haven't had much experience with them and needed some advice.

[pshute]

I already have an DSLR, Canon 20D with the 100-400 ISM. I also have a chronic pain problem and can't lug around that much weight anymore. That's why I want to try out these advanced P&S cameras.
An SLR user "downgrading"? Then I guess you will want to retain as much of the typical SLR controls as possible. I'd be interested to hear your opinion of the Fujifilm S100FS that I mentioned, if you get to look at one.

And you might also be interested in looking at one of the Four Thirds SLRs - much smaller lenses than your Canon, but still an SLR.

If weight is the problem, and the solution you're considering is to change to a compact camera, I wonder if simply swapping to a lighter lens would help? I don't know if such a thing exists, but if it does then I assume it would not be as sharp as your Canon lens, perhaps being of similar quality to the lens you'd get with a compact. Does anyone know if such a thing exists?

[Cristian Mihai]

There is a relative light and cheap DSLR solution: Olympus E-420/620 + Zuiko Digital 70-300 mm f4.0-5.6. This combo is about 1.2 kilogrames and you'll have an 600 mm equiv.